Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Study protocol

The Sternal Management Accelerated Recovery Trial (S.M.A.R.T) – standard restrictive versus an intervention of modified sternal precautions following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Authors: Md Ali Katijjahbe, Linda Denehy, Catherine L. Granger, Alistair Royse, Colin Royse, Rebecca Bates, Sarah Logie, Sandy Clarke, Doa El-Ansary

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The routine implementation of sternal precautions to prevent sternal complications that restrict the use of the upper limbs is currently worldwide practice following a median sternotomy. However, evidence is limited and drawn primarily from cadaver studies and orthopaedic research. Sternal precautions may delay recovery, prolong hospital discharge and be overly restrictive. Recent research has shown that upper limb exercise reduces post-operative sternal pain and results in minimal micromotion between the sternal edges as measured by ultrasound. The aims of this study are to evaluate the effects of modified sternal precautions on physical function, pain, recovery and health-related quality of life after cardiac surgery.

Methods/design

This study is a phase II, double-blind, randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinding of patients and assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. Patients (n = 72) will be recruited following cardiac surgery via a median sternotomy. Sample size calculations were based on the minimal important difference (two points) for the primary outcome: Short Physical Performance Battery. Thirty-six participants are required per group to counter dropout (20%). All participants will be randomised to receive either standard or modified sternal precautions. The intervention group will receive guidelines encouraging the safe use of the upper limbs. Secondary outcomes are upper limb function, pain, kinesiophobia and health-related quality of life. Descriptive statistics will be used to summarise data. The primary hypothesis will be examined by repeated-measures analysis of variance to evaluate the changes from baseline to 4 weeks post-operatively in the intervention arm compared with the usual-care arm. In all tests to be conducted, a p value <0.05 (two-tailed) will be considered statistically significant, and confidence intervals will be reported.

Discussion

The Sternal Management Accelerated Recovery Trial (S.M.A.R.T.) is a two-centre randomised controlled trial powered and designed to investigate whether the effects of modifying sternal precautions to include the safe use of the upper limbs and trunk impact patients’ physical function and recovery following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy.

Trial registration

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ACTRN12615000968​572. Registered on 16 September 2015 (prospectively registered).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Epstein AJ, Polsky D, Yang F, Yang L, Groeneveld PW. Coronary revascularization trends in the United States, 2001–2008. JAMA. 2011;305(17):1769–76.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
3.
4.
Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, Collet JP, Cremer J, Falk V, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS): developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014;35(37):2541–619.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Deb S, Wijeysundera HC, Ko DT, Tsubota H, Hill S, Fremes SE. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery vs percutaneous interventions in coronary revascularization: a systematic review. JAMA. 2013;310(19):2086–95.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Rosenfeldt FL, Wilson MD, Buxton BF, Marasco SF. Coronary artery bypass surgery provides long-term results superior to percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart Lung Circ. 2012;21(1):1–11.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Cahalin LP, Lapier TK, Shaw DK. Sternal precautions: is it time for change? Precautions versus restrictions – a review of literature and recommendations for revision. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2011;22(1):5–15.PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Mazzeffi M, Khelemsky Y. Poststernotomy pain: a clinical review. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2011;25(6):1163–78.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Tran L, Dahya D, Carson N, Billah B, Shardey G, Reid CM; Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) Database Steering Committee 2014. ANZSCTS National Cardiac Surgery Database Program: national annual report 2013. Melbourne: ANZSCTS.
11.
Balachandran S, Lee A, Denehy L, Lin KY, Royse A, Royse C, et al. Risk factors for sternal complications after cardiac operations: a systematic review. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102(6):2109–17.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Mekontso Dessap A, Vivier E, Girou E, Brun-Buisson C, Kirsch M. Effect of time to onset on clinical features and prognosis of post-sternotomy mediastinitis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011;17(2):292–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Balachandran S, Lee A, Royse A, Denehy L, El-Ansary D. Upper limb exercise prescription following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: a web survey. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2014;34(6):390–5.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Tuyl LJ, Mackney JH, Johnston CL. Management of sternal precautions following median sternotomy by physical therapists in Australia: a web-based survey. Phys Ther. 2012;92(1):83–97.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Fedak PW, Kolb E, Borsato G, Frohlich DE, Kasatkin A, Narine K, et al. Kryptonite bone cement prevents pathologic sternal displacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;90(3):979–85.CrossRefPubMed
16.
McGregor WE, Trumble DR, Magovern JA. Mechanical analysis of midline sternotomy wound closure. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999;117(6):1144–50.CrossRef
17.
18.
Adams J, Pullum G, Stafford P, Hanners N, Hartman J, Strauss D, et al. Challenging traditional activity limits after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a simulated lawn-mowing activity. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2008;28(2):118–21.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Brocki BC, Thorup CB, Andreasen JJ. Precautions related to midline sternotomy in cardiac surgery: a review of mechanical stress factors leading to sternal complications. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2010;9(2):77–84.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Sturgess T, Denehy L, Tully E, et al. A pilot thoracic exercise programme reduces early (0–6 weeks) sternal pain following open heart surgery. Int J Ther Rehabil. 2014;21(3):110–7.CrossRef
21.
Harms CA. Effect of skeletal muscle demand on cardiovascular function. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(1):94–9.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
Yamato TP, Maher CG, Saragiotto BT, Hoffmann TC, Moseley AM. How completely are physiotherapy interventions described in reports of randomised trials? Physiotherapy. 2016;102(2):121–6.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Overend TJ, Anderson CM, Jackson J, Lucy SD, Prendergast M, Sinclair S. Physical therapy management for adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a Canadian practice survey. Physiother Can. 2010;62(3):215–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Price KJ, Gordon BA, Bird SR, Benson AC. A review of guidelines for cardiac rehabilitation exercise programmes: is there an international consensus? Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23(16):1715–33.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Molino-Lova R, Pasquini G, Vannetti F, Paperini A, Forconi T, Polcaro P, et al. Effects of a structured physical activity intervention on measures of physical performance in frail elderly patients after cardiac rehabilitation: a pilot study with 1-year follow-up. Intern Emerg Med. 2013;8(7):581–9.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Pieper CF, Leveille SG, Markides KS, Ostir GV, et al. Lower extremity function and subsequent disability: consistency across studies, predictive models, and value of gait speed alone compared with the Short Physical Performance Battery. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2000;55(4):M221–31.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Ostchega Y, Harris TB, Hirsch R, Parsons VL, Kington R, Katzoff M. Reliability and prevalence of physical performance examination assessing mobility and balance in older persons in the US: data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000;48(9):1136–41.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Freiberger E, de Vreede P, Schoene D, Rydwik E, Mueller V, Frändin K, et al. Performance-based physical function in older community-dwelling persons: a systematic review of instruments. Age Ageing. 2012;41(6):712–21.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Min L, Mazzurco L, Gure TR, Cigolle CT, Lee P, Bloem C, et al. Longitudinal functional recovery after geriatric cardiac surgery. J Surg Res. 2015;194(1):25–33.CrossRefPubMed
31.
LIFE Study Investigators. Effects of a physical activity intervention on measures of physical performance: results of the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Pilot (LIFE-P) study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61(11):1157–65. A published erratum appears in J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007;62(3):337.
32.
Studenski S, Perera S, Wallace D, Chandler JM, Duncan PW, Rooney E, et al. Physical performance measures in the clinical setting. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51(3):314–22.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Simonsick EM, Salive ME, Wallace RB. Lower-extremity function in persons over the age of 70 years as a predictor of subsequent disability. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(9):556–61.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Perera S, Mody SH, Woodman RC, Studenski SA. Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006;54(5):743–9.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Volpato S, Cavalieri M, Guerra G, Sioulis F, Ranzini M, Maraldi C, et al. Performance-based functional assessment in older hospitalized patients: feasibility and clinical correlates. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(12):1393–8.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Ostir GV, Markides KS, Black SA, Goodwin JS. Lower body functioning as a predictor of subsequent disability among older Mexican Americans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1998;53:M491–5.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Hoggins T. Physiotherapy after open heart surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Master’s thesis. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne; 2009.
38.
Teoh M, Lalondrelle S, Roughton M, Grocott-Mason R, Dubrey SW. Acute coronary syndromes and their presentation in Asian and Caucasian patients in Britain. Heart. 2007;93(2):183–8.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Milner KA, Vaccarino V, Arnold AL, Funk M, Goldberg RJ. Gender and age differences in chief complaints of acute myocardial infarction (Worcester Heart Attack Study). Am J Cardiol. 2004;93(5):606–8.CrossRefPubMed
40.
King-Shier KM, Singh S, LeBlanc P, Mather CM, Humphrey R, Quan H, et al. The influence of ethnicity and gender on navigating an acute coronary syndrome event. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015;14(3):240–7.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Lovejoy TI, Turk DC, Morasco BJ. Evaluation of the psychometric properties of the revised short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. J Pain. 2012;13(12):1250–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
42.
Puntillo K, Weiss SJ. Pain: its mediators and associated morbidity in critically ill cardiovascular surgical patients. Nurs Res. 1994;43(1):31–6.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Yorke J, Wallis M, McLean B. Patients’ perceptions of pain management after cardiac surgery in an Australian critical care unit. Heart Lung. 2004;33(1):33–41.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Kori SH, Miller RP, Todd DD. Kinesiophobia: a new view of chronic pain behavior. Pain Manag. 1990;3(1):35–43.
45.
Tkachuk GA, Harris CA. Psychometric properties of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia-11 (TSK-11). J Pain. 2012;13(10):970–7.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Woby SR, Roach NK, Urmston M, Watson PJ. Psychometric properties of the TSK-11: a shortened version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. Pain. 2005;117(1-2):137–44.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Fess E. Grip strength. In: American Society of Hand Therapists. Clinical assessment recommendations. 2nd ed. Chicago: American Society of Hand Therapists; 1992. p. 41-45.
48.
Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Oberg B. Intra- and inter-tester reliability and reference values for hand strength. J Rehab Med. 2001;33(1):36–41.
49.
Hamilton A, Balnave R, Adams R. Grip strength testing reliability. J Hand Ther. 1994;7(3):163–70.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Roberts HC, Denison HJ, Martin HJ, Patel HP, Syddall H, Cooper C, et al. A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: towards a standardised approach. Age Ageing. 2011;40(4):423–9.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Bohannon RW. Dynamometer measurements of hand-grip strength predict multiple outcomes. Percept Mot Skills. 2001;93(2):323–8.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Puthoff ML, Saskowski D. Reliability and responsiveness of gait speed, five times sit to stand, and hand grip strength for patients in cardiac rehabilitation. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2013;24(1):31–7.PubMedPubMedCentral
53.
Ware Jr JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to score version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey: standards & acute forms. QualityMetric: Lincoln, RI; 2001.
54.
Falcoz PE, Chocron S, Stoica L, Kaili D, Puyraveau M, Mercier M, et al. Open heart surgery: one-year self-assessment of quality of life and functional outcome. Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;76(5):1598–604.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Morone NE, Weiner DK, Belnap BH, Karp JF, Mazumdar S, Houck PR, et al. The impact of pain and depression on recovery after coronary artery bypass grafting. Psychosom Med. 2010;72(7):620–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
56.
Wattson EK, Firman DW, Baade PD, Ring I. Telephone administration of the SF-36 health survey: validation studies and population norms for adults in Queensland. Aust N Z J Public Health. 1996;20(4):359–63.CrossRef
57.
El Ansary D, Waddington G, Adams R. Trunk stabilisation exercises reduce sternal separation in chronic sternal instability after cardiac surgery: a randomised cross-over trial. Aust J Physiother. 2007;53(4):255–60.CrossRefPubMed
58.
El-Ansary D, Adams R, Toms L, Elkins M. Sternal instability following coronary artery bypass grafting. Physiother Theory Pract. 2000;16(1):27–33.CrossRef
59.
Davidson M, Keating JL. A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther. 2002;82(1):8–24.CrossRefPubMed
60.
de Morton NA, Davidson M, Keating JL. Validity, responsiveness and the minimal clinically important difference for the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in an older acute medical population. BMC Geriatr. 2010;10:72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
61.
Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 3rd ed. Pearson Education/Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ; 2009.
62.
Adams J, Lotshaw A, Exum E, Campbell M, Spranger CB, Beveridge J, et al. An alternative approach to prescribing sternal precautions after median sternotomy, “Keep Your Move in the Tube”. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2016;29(1):97–100.
63.
Fedak PW, Kieser TM, Maitland AM, Holland M, Kasatkin A, Leblanc P, et al. Adhesive-enhanced sternal closure to improve postoperative functional recovery: a pilot, randomized controlled trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(4):1444–50.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Adams J, Cline MJ, Hubbard M, McCullough T, Hartman J. A new paradigm for post-cardiac event resistance exercise guidelines. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97(2):281–6.CrossRefPubMed
65.
El-Ansary D, Waddington G, Adams R. Relationship between pain and upper limb movement in patients with chronic sternal instability following cardiac surgery. Physiother Theory Pract. 2007;23(5):273–80.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The Sternal Management Accelerated Recovery Trial (S.M.A.R.T) – standard restrictive versus an intervention of modified sternal precautions following cardiac surgery via median sternotomy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Authors
Md Ali Katijjahbe
Linda Denehy
Catherine L. Granger
Alistair Royse
Colin Royse
Rebecca Bates
Sarah Logie
Sandy Clarke
Doa El-Ansary
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-1974-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Trials 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research

Lessons from the field: the conduct of randomized controlled trials in Botswana

Study protocol

Rituximab versus cyclophosphamide for the treatment of connective tissue disease-associated interstitial lung disease (RECITAL): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Study protocol

The WE-Study: does botulinum toxin A make walking easier in children with cerebral palsy?: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Efficacy and safety of indacaterol/glycopyrronium fixed-dose combination in mild-to-moderate COPD patients symptomatic on tiotropium in Korea: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

Improving diets and nutrition through an integrated poultry value chain and nutrition intervention (SELEVER) in Burkina Faso: study protocol for a randomized trial

Study protocol

Standardising the reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials: protocol for the development of a core outcome set and accompanying outcome measurement instrument set (the GASTROS study)